Utopian States: Loves happy people

The government of 1792 America was superior to today’s government if only because the lack of taxes, bureaucracy and law would facilitate easy improvement. Surprisingly, ultra liberals, ultra conservatives, radicals, and reactionaries, agree. This isn’t only a right or left wing conclusion; this is a unifying principle. You see, right really does meet left. It isn’t just theory.

The years subsequent to 1792 showed that that early government was flawed. The bill of rights didn’t protect human rights sufficiently to protect the Indians and slaves from subjugation, abuse, torture and even death.. Nor did those early rights give women the right to vote. The 1792 enumeration of rights were not sufficient to keep government from denying rights to prisoners and other captives. The 1792 enumeration of rights did not grant sufficient rights to taxpayers and property owners. The 1792 enumeration of rights were also not sufficient to keep government from thinking that government itself — the laws, procedures, and buildings — were more important than the collective population. The 1792 enumeration of rights were also not sufficient to keep government, and government employees from being accorded prejudicially favored treatment.

With some adjustments to the bill of rights, this government could be rebooted to a much saner government.

My informal polling in barber shops, classes, work environment, at home and with friends does not find ANY that have indicated they intend to vote for Obama or even that they like Obama. This poll was conducted in Massachusetts among voters that traditionally vote with the Democratic party. The numbers and results of the poll are statistically significant enough to say with 99% confidence that Obama will NOT get 50% of the vote in Massachusetts.

The results of my informal poll compare favorably to recent election results between Hillary and Obama.

There is no evidence or reason to believe that people than preferred Bush to Gore were reversing their preferences. There is no reason or evidence to indicate that people that voted for Bush in the last two elections will now vote for Obama.

There is evidence and reason to believe that women and others that supported Hillary are now making plans NOT to vote for Obama.

Only half the Democratic party voted for Obama. This 25% of the population was comprised of people of African decent (about 13% of the population). In other words, Fifty percent of the people that voted for Obama were predominately of African decent. Obama will not get this favorable an outcome from an electorate that is 77% on non African decent.

Major polling companies give Obama a 5% lead in the general election. This, when compared with the first several paragraphs shows a split in the space-time continuum. The given explanation that the young are voting for Obama is not an adequate reason to explain the totally irreconcilable differences between observation and traditional polls. My poll is somewhat flawed in that it was taken of a population set that is significantly older and more white than normal. Some Hispanics contributed to the poll.

Conclusion: The polling organizations are either lying or there is unexplained phenomena or meddling at work.

I don’t presently endorse any candidate.

My informal polling in barber shops, classes, work environment, at home and with friends does not find ANY that have indicated they intend to vote for Obama or even that they like Obama. This poll was conducted in Massachusetts among voters that traditionally vote with the Democratic party. The numbers and results of the poll are statistically significant enough to say with 99% confidence that Obama will NOT get 50% of the vote in Massachusetts.

The results of my informal poll compare favorably to recent election results between Hillary and Obama.

There is no evidence or reason to believe that people than preferred Bush to Gore were reversing their preferences. There is no reason or evidence to indicate that people that voted for Bush in the last two elections will now vote for Obama.

There is evidence and reason to believe that women and others that supported Hillary are now making plans NOT to vote for Obama.

Only half the Democratic party voted for Obama. This 25% of the population was comprised of people of African decent (about 13% of the population). In other words, Fifty percent of the people that voted for Obama were predominately of African decent. Obama will not get this favorable an outcome from an electorate that is 77% on non African decent.

Major polling companies give Obama a 5% lead in the general election. This, when compared with the first several paragraphs shows a split in the space-time continuum. The given explanation that the young are voting for Obama is not an adequate reason to explain the totally irreconcilable differences between observation and traditional polls. My poll is somewhat flawed in that it was taken of a population set that is significantly older and more white than normal. Some Hispanics contributed to the poll.

Conclusion: The polling organizations are either lying or there is unexplained phenomena or meddling at work.

I don’t presently endorse any candidate.

A thin majority — a 50-50 split — is a decision that only shows perfect indecision and confusion. Any so called democracy that makes decisions based on a vote where the winning margin is less than twenty-five percent is foolish.

The DNC should use their convention to actually decide the election rather than to try and pimp a candidate with slim credentials. The “Madison Avenue” approach to using marketing techniques to spin up a candidate is actually sinister.

In Peru, the field is narrowed to two candidates, then the WHOLE country gets to vote on the two remaining candidates. I would vote differently if I had another vote.

There are a lot of other potential methods for selecting a candidate. Perhaps there should be two times through the gamut.

Perhaps we should have a shared presidency. Perhaps there should be two spokespersons/presidents, one for each party.

Making a decision based on a 50-50 vote is a fallacy. A vote of 50-50 does not make a logical or meritorious decision. Making a decision based on a 50-50 split would be like the computer engineer deciding to determine whether a bit was a logical one or a logical zero by taking the average of a few million bits. Ha. In computer circuits a logical zero is below 1.2 volts and a logical one is above 2.4 volts. Everything in the middle is rejected.

Reject the close decisions. Design our nation correctly.

A good conservative approach is to find and eliminate or correct the flaws and defects of government and society.

A good liberal approach is to firstly to improve human rights of ALL the people and secondly to propose valid and well engineered plans and programs.

Republicans are not good conservatives and Democrats are not good liberals. The concepts of conservative and liberal, as stated, are good. However, both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party have diverged from healthy approaches to government and society.

Liberals aren’t just for blacks or women, they are supposed to be for human rights. Liberals are supposed to be for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, not just blacks and women! Where is the white man in their scheme of the future world?

Liberals aren’t just for the poor, they are supposed to be for human rights. Liberals are supposed to be for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, not just for handouts to the poor. The wealthy have the right to low taxes just as the poor have the right to food, shelter and clothing.

Liberals aren’t for the children, they are supposed to be for human rights. Liberals are supposed to be for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, not just children. Grownups have the right to jobs, justice (free from police and court brutalities) and the pursuit of happiness just as the children have the right to food, shelter and clothing, education, medical care and a decent family.

Liberals and democrats should stand for human rights for ALL. The democratic party seems to miss the barn if they do not stand for the rights of ALL. It is not a trade. Democrats seem to be trading the rights of the adult male for women, children and minorities. What is this simplistic marketing venue?

Get a life Democrats, you should make the point that you are for human rights. You know, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness? That type of stuff. You fail if you take sides. You cannot be for human rights and for only one sex, race, or income level.

Do Democrats understand the human race?

Liberals aren’t just for blacks or women, they are supposed to be for human rights. Liberals are supposed to be for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, not just blacks and women! Where is the white man in their scheme of the future world?

Liberals aren’t just for the poor, they are supposed to be for human rights. Liberals are supposed to be for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, not just for handouts to the poor. The wealthy have the right to low taxes just as the poor have the right to food, shelter and clothing.

Liberals aren’t for the children, they are supposed to be for human rights. Liberals are supposed to be for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, not just children. Grownups have the right to jobs, justice (free from police and court brutalities) and the pursuit of happiness just as the children have the right to food, shelter and clothing, education, medical care and a decent family.

Liberals and democrats should stand for human rights for ALL. The democratic party seems to miss the barn if they do not stand for the rights of ALL. It is not a trade. Democrats seem to be trading the rights of the adult male for women, children and minorities. What is this simplistic marketing venue?

Get a life Democrats, you should make the point that you are for human rights. You know, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness? That type of stuff. You fail if you take sides. You cannot be for human rights and for only one sex, race, or income level.

Do Democrats understand the human race?

A vote that has a nearly even outcome is not a decision – it is indecision. A 50-50 vote represents the ultimate doubt. There can be no greater doubt than a 50-50 decision. It is the perfect uncertainty.

Polls show that the American government, at least the part that’s in Washington, does not even have an approval rating of 30 percent. More than 70 percent of the people polled suggest that the American government is NOT doing a good job. That is decisive! I’ll bet more than 30% of Americans would approve of the job the lowly maggot is doing!

Perhaps if two candidates split the vote, they should also split the job. A 50-50 outcome is NOT a good thing.

The Gore-Bush election decided nothing. It made people mad. The Obama-Hillary election likewise decided nothing. It has also made people angry. For good reason too! The outcome was the ultimate democratic uncertainty: a 50-50 split.